Commercialisation of resources taken from commons is considered problematic in several ways in traditional commons scholarship. In particular common-pool resource (CPR) theory argues that institutions for collective action such as commons are largely autonomous, experiencing little influence from either the market or the state, and focusing only on the needs of entitled (local) communities. Consequently, commercialisation and sustainable collective use of common-pool resources are largely considered incompatible. Moreover, the dominant focus of CPR theory is on renewable resources rather than non-renewable resources such as peat. Although commons scholarship has broadened over the last decades and come to more nuanced views on the state-market-common trichotomy, our study adds historical depth and does pay attention to peat as a valuable non-renewable resource. We analyse historical sources on two cases of peat commercialisation from raised bog commons in the early modern Low Countries: the Bakelse gemeint in the Dutch Peel region, and the commune de Xhoffraix in the Belgian Hautes-Fagnes. In terms of volume, the share of commercialised peat in the total peat exploitation was limited; the significance of peat commercialisation lay in its permanence, recurrence, and/or regional outreach. Taxes and high debts placed communities in dire financial straits, which was one of the motives for peat commercialisation. In addition, state institutions could intervene in commons management if there was an (internal) conflict. Sources indicate that these institutions had a pragmatic attitude towards peat commercialisation, probably to foster social harmony and local prosperity in times of resource contestation and economic hardship. This study adds a novel intermediate category of peat exploitation to the traditional binary subdivision in domestic peat extraction from commons versus large-scale commercial exploitation of privatised bogs. We demonstrate that long-term use of common-pool resources could go together with a moderate degree of commercialisation. Rather than being fully autonomous, commons in the early modern Low Countries were – permanently or at times of internal conflict – clearly impacted by markets, notions of private user rights, and state institutions. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Maurice Paulissen Wageningen University, The Netherlands maurice.paulissen@wur.nl

中文翻译：

---

急需还是机会？早期现代低地国家高地沼泽地的反复泥炭商业化

在传统的公地学术研究中，从公地获取资源的商业化在几个方面被认为是有问题的。特别是公共池资源 (CPR) 理论认为，诸如公地等集体行动的机构在很大程度上是自治的，几乎不受市场或国家的影响，并且只关注有资格的（当地）社区的需求。因此，公共池资源的商业化和可持续集体使用在很大程度上被认为是不相容的。此外，CPR 理论的主要关注点是可再生资源，而不是泥炭等不可再生资源。尽管在过去的几十年里，公共学术已经扩大，并且对国家-市场-公共三分法有了更细致的看法，我们的研究增加了历史深度，并确实关注泥炭作为一种宝贵的不可再生资源。我们分析了现代早期低地国家高地沼泽公地泥炭商业化的两个案例的历史资料：荷兰皮尔地区的 Bakelse gemeint 和比利时 Hautes-Fagnes 的 commune de Xhoffraix。从数量上看，商业化泥炭在泥炭开采总量中的份额有限；泥炭商业化的重要性在于其持久性、重复性和/或区域推广。税收和高额债务使社区陷入财务困境，这是泥炭商业化的动机之一。此外，如果发生（内部）冲突，国家机构可以干预公地管理。消息来源表明，这些机构对泥炭商业化持务实态度，可能是为了在资源争夺和经济困难时期促进社会和谐和地方繁荣。本研究在国内从公地提取泥炭的传统二元细分与私有化沼泽的大规模商业开采相比，增加了一种新的泥炭开采中间类别。我们证明了公共池资源的长期使用可以与适度的商业化程度相结合。早期现代低地国家的公地不是完全自治的，而是永久地或在内部冲突时受到市场、私人用户权利概念和国家机构的影响。通讯作者：莫里斯保利森瓦赫宁根大学，荷兰 maurice.paulissen@wur。